thelotuseffect wrote:Well Vipassana notes all arising and passing away phenomena. Noting all phenomena is not a step in Bhante V's method. The only noticing occurs during the event of a hindrance and then purifying that before coming back to your meditation object.

thelotuseffect wrote:Well Vipassana notes all arising and passing away phenomena. Noting all phenomena is not a step in Bhante V's method. The only noticing occurs during the event of a hindrance and then purifying that before coming back to your meditation object.

This is becoming trite and obtuse.

So, following Vimalaramsi's method, what do you between noting the hindrances?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

thelotuseffect wrote:Knowledge and vision are attainments achieved through practice. By learning how minds attention works through meditation one gains insight into Dependent Origination which is an impersonal process.

So, how does this work doing metta practice?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

thelotuseffect wrote:Stay on your object of meditation. Mine is generating metta. If no hindrance arises then chances are high that you are in a jhana.

Metta practice will lead to arahanta? Where does insight into the three mark come to play in this practice?

I listened to a lot of Bhante V's talks back in 2007/2008 so perhaps I can have a go at answering this.

Bhante V's instructions use metta as the primary object (to use Mahasi terminology) for building concentration. When a hindrance arises one is aware of it, goes through the 6R process he describes, then goes back to the object (metta). The awareness of the hindrances is the vipassana aspect (the hindrances are anicca, dukkha, anatta, they arise via the DO sequence, etc, similar to how other teachers would teach it).

So, in broad terms, it's not that different from what many teachers teach, except that:1. I have not come across other teachers using metta in quite this way, as a "primary object" in vipassana-oriented practice. Most other teachers use objects like breath, abdominal motion, motion of feet, etc for that. 2. The 6R thing is a different way of explaining how to get back to the primary object from the way other teachers explain it.

thelotuseffect wrote:Stay on your object of meditation. Mine is generating metta. If no hindrance arises then chances are high that you are in a jhana.

Metta practice will lead to arahanta? Where does insight into the three mark come to play in this practice?

I listened to a lot of Bhante V's talks back in 2007/2008 so perhaps I can have a go at answering this.

Bhante V's instructions use metta as the primary object (to use Mahasi terminology) for building concentration. When a hindrance arises one is aware of it, goes through the 6R process he describes, then goes back to the object (metta). The awareness of the hindrances is the vipassana aspect (the hindrances are anicca, dukkha, anatta, they arise via the DO sequence, etc, similar to how other teachers would teach it).

So, in broad terms, it's not that different from what many teachers teach, except that:1. I have not come across other teachers using metta in quite this way, as a "primary object" in vipassana-oriented practice. Most other teachers use objects like breath, abdominal motion, motion of feet, etc for that. 2. The 6R thing is a different way of explaining how to get back to the primary object from the way other teachers explain it.

But I don't see any serious contradictions.

Mike

Thanks. Basically, then, Vimalaramsi is teaching nothing really new.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

That's my impression. If I ignore all his statements about other teachers, it seems to me that he has his own way of explaining how to examine experience that doesn't particularly disagree with what I've learned from others. But I've never seriously used his instructions, so I'm just going on what I've listened to.

That's my impression. If I ignore all his statements about other teachers, it seems to me that he has his own way of explaining how to examine experience that doesn't particularly disagree with what I've learned from others. But I've never seriously used his instructions, so I'm just going on what I've listened to.

Basically, then it is repackaged vipassana, still using "noting" -- developed by Mahasi Sayadaw -- as a primary tool. But from what has been presented in these videos it seems a bit fuzzy. Maybe the Vimalaramsi practice could be explained a more detail.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

When I look in terms of general approach I see more similarities than differences between what I use and what most of the "vipassana" teachers teach (e.g. most of Ajahn Chah's students). I've had a couple of short retreats with Ajahn Tiradhammo (an Ajahn Chah student), which again isn't so different from Mahasi (though he doesn't use noting, there's still that primary/secondary object thing). He did say, though that the most useful meditation book he found was The Heart of Buddhist Meditation by Ven Nyanaponika...

That's my impression. If I ignore all his statements about other teachers, it seems to me that he has his own way of explaining how to examine experience that doesn't particularly disagree with what I've learned from others. But I've never seriously used his instructions, so I'm just going on what I've listened to.

Basically, then it is repackaged vipassana, still using "noting" -- developed by Mahasi Sayadaw -- as a primary tool. But from what has been presented in these videos it seems a bit fuzzy. Maybe the Vimalaramsi practice could be explained a more detail.

Bhante V does not use mental noting, so it is VERY different from Mahasi's method. Furthermore while Bhante V teaches to return to only one object (metta or anapanasati) it also differs from Mahasi's method where you observe and label different objects.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Alex123 wrote:Bhante V does not use mental noting, so it is VERY different from Mahasi's method. Furthermore while Bhante V teaches to return to only one object (metta or anapanasati) it also differs from Mahasi's method where you observe and label different objects.

Vimalaramsi's method has been described this way by two others, which does not give us a picture of something radically different from the Burmese method from which it is obviously derived:

Bhante V's instructions use metta as the primary object (to use Mahasi terminology) for building concentration. When a hindrance arises one is aware of it, goes through the 6R process he describes, then goes back to the object (metta). The awareness of the hindrances is the vipassana aspect (the hindrances are anicca, dukkha, anatta, they arise via the DO sequence, etc, similar to how other teachers would teach it).viewtopic.php?f=33&t=8655&start=40#p149623. . .

Well Vipassana notes all arising and passing away phenomena. Noting all phenomena is not a step in Bhante V's method. The only noticing occurs during the event of a hindrance and then purifying that before coming back to your meditation object.viewtopic.php?f=33&t=8655&start=40#p149640

So, in broad terms, it's not that different from what many teachers teach, except that:1. I have not come across other teachers using metta in quite this way, as a "primary object" in vipassana-oriented practice. Most other teachers use objects like breath, abdominal motion, motion of feet, etc for that. 2. The 6R thing is a different way of explaining how to get back to the primary object from the way other teachers explain it.

Alex123 wrote:Bhante V does not use mental noting, so it is VERY different from Mahasi's method. Furthermore while Bhante V teaches to return to only one object (metta or anapanasati) it also differs from Mahasi's method where you observe and label different objects.

Vimalaramsi's method has been described this way by two others, which does not give us a picture of something radically different from the Burmese method from which it is obviously derived:

In Mahasi's method one changes the object depending on whether one is sitting, walking, or doing daily activities.

In Vimalaramsi's method one is supposed to stick to one primary object (most often metta, sometimes anapanasati) no matter what one is doing such as sitting ,walking or doing daily activities. Another difference.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."